UK soldiers die in Afghan blast (Why are they using Wimiks?)

UK soldiers die in Afghan blast (Why are they using Wimiks?)

news.bbc.co.uk

Three British soldiers have been killed by an enemy improvised explosive device in southern Afghanistan, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has said.

(visit the link for the full news article)

What interests me about this story is the type of vehicle they were traveling in... Wimik. I simply do not understand, there has been uproar over British soldiers using the old Snatch Land Rovers as they are so lightly protected, as a result the government places billions of pounds worth of new orders.
Can someone please tell me why it makes sense to deploy a vehicle to Afghanistan that has no outer skin or protection... no wonder three of our soldiers are now dead.

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Originally posted by Thirst


What interests me about this story is the type of vehicle they were traveling in... Wimik. I simply do not understand, there has been uproar over British soldiers using the old Snatch Land Rovers as they are so lightly protected, as a result the government places billions of pounds worth of new orders.
Can someone please tell me why it makes sense to deploy a vehicle to Afghanistan that has no outer skin or protection... no wonder three of our soldiers are now dead.

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Because all the money went into the new digs in New Babylon in the "Green" Zone.

Yes sir. Green like in green backs. Your money and mine.

The place is bigger than Vatican City and Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove will be kings in their own little kingdom just like the Pharaohs of old.

Home Sweet home built on the blood sweat and tears of our children.

But don't stop there do a quick search for all those other billions that they took on their way out the door.

You will be amazed.

reply to post by Thirst


I am sure that the new all singing and dancing vehicle's for our boys were ment to be ready by now.
Mind you saying that, They may have been scaled back to allow the Govt to give money hand over fist to the banks.

reply to post by NightSkyeB4Dawn


That is correct. The same exact thing has happened with U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq being sent to war without proper body and vehicle armor. Many people in the U.S. are rightfully furious over this, but they see it as a sign of government incompetence.
Its not incompetence. The military industrial complex does not care about the lives of our soldiers, it cares about making money through continued arms spending. If our soldiers were too well equipped, the wars might end too soon and the arms contractors like Bush Sr.'s Carlyle group will miss out on all the profits that can be reaped from an extended war. This is also why a lot of American weapons end up in the hands of our enemies.
The military industrial complex, along with the banking institutions that profit from the enormous debts that are generated by these conflicts, are also the ones who are ultimately responsible for the starting them in the first place.
The entire thing is a money making scam. Every war the United States has been involved in since WWI, and probably most of the wars before that, has been a money making scam for banks and multinational corporations. Its one of the oldest, and deadliest tricks in the great book of screwing people over and taking them for all their worth.

reply to post by Thirst


a lot of the soldiers like the ability to bug out of their vehicles quickly which is why they like the landrovers, landrover have also produced a new and improved snatch which can handle the ieds much better, but i spose the ieds ill just get bigger, your only semi bomb proof in a tank